[Standards] eventlogging xeps

Peter Waher Peter.Waher at clayster.com
Tue Dec 10 16:36:30 UTC 2013


Hello Waqas

It is correct that I looked at XEP-0122 when describing data types of tags, this is the reason I forgot to add the namespace declaration, which would have been the correct thing to do. I didn't want to limit the types used to those referred to in that XEP, but if possible it would be best to use those. 

The updated proposal contains namespace declarations where needed.

Best regards,
Peter Waher


-----Original Message-----
From: Waqas Hussain [mailto:waqas20 at gmail.com] 
Sent: den 9 december 2013 18:20
To: XMPP Standards
Subject: Re: [Standards] eventlogging xeps

On Mon, Dec 9, 2013 at 4:04 PM, Waqas Hussain <waqas20 at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 2, 2013 at 9:58 AM, Peter Waher <Peter.Waher at clayster.com> wrote:
>> Hello Philipp
>>
>> Thanks for your input. I've updated the according to your comments, and attach a new version.
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Peter Waher
>>
>
> Hey Peter,
>
> Something which I don't think has been discussed: Encoding. I'm 
> assuming syslog-to-xmpp bridging is something you wish to enable.
> Syslog does recommend UTF-8, but doesn't require it. Data can be 
> non-UTF-8. Also, syslog messages can be truncated by bytes, which can 
> lead to invalid UTF-8 at the end of a message (the spec specifically 
> points this out). And lastly, syslog messages may contain a 
> byte-order-mark (BOM) at the start of messages to specify encoding.
> Also, XML supports a subset of UTF-8, not all UTF-8 characters are 
> allowed.
>
> What we probably want is some form of escaping to be specified in the 
> spec. Perhaps as simple as: replace \ with \\ and replace any invalid 
> XML bytes with \XX, XX being the byte in hex. BOMs should be removed 
> if available, and data should be converted to UTF-8 if possible.
>
> One thing which looks awkward to me are the 'type' attributes in the 
> 'tag' element. What's a use-case where specifying the data-type would 
> help the receiver (particularly when this would generally be the same 
> in every log message sent by the entity)? And while you are using 
> 'xs:*', the 'xs' namespace isn't defined in the XML stream the stanza 
> is in.
>
> --
> Waqas Hussain

Lance and I just had a little chat about the xs: prefix in the Prosody chatroom (here's hoping the formatting comes out nicely):

Lance
4:07 waqas: is it required to have a namespace declared when using a prefixed attribute *value*? I thought those values were literally xs:*, just a hack to make unique registry values easier

waqas
4:08 Lance: Required? Arguably. Look at everywhere you see xs:* being used. Schemas, SOAP, etc. It's always specified, and interpreted in that context.
4:08 We could certainly define it to always be xs:* in the spec
4:08 But that's not normal

Lance
4:09 because it looks like the same pattern as 122
4:09 !xep 0122

HAL
4:09 Lance: XEP-0122: Data Forms Validation is Standards Track (Draft,
2004-09-22) See: http://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0122.html

waqas
4:10 Ah, that XEP specifically defines it as "    *    Start with
"xs:", and be one of the "built-in" datatypes defined in XML Schema Part 2 [2]"

Lance
4:10 right, with a method to add new prefixes too

waqas
4:11 (which is unusual mind you, you have full freedom to use whatever suffix you want in SOAP and XML Schema)
4:11 *prefix

waqas
4:11 Lance: Should I post this little chat to the list?

Lance
4:11 yeah

Lance
4:12 i'd say we'd make the eventlogging stuff reuse the types from 122
4:12 ah, which it does already
4:12 section 5.9 of whichever version this is that i'm looking at

waqas
4:12 That makes sense




More information about the Standards mailing list